On Trump and Morality

Hey, when you take a strong position on an issue, you're likely to get some feedback. Not all of it is going to be positive. Take Mark Galli, Editor-in-Chief of Christianity Today Magazine. He recently published an editorial condemning President Trump and asserting that he was "morally unfit" to be President. Not a huge problem by itself…everybody’s entitled to their opinion…except that Galli unwisely invoked the name of Reverend Billy Graham, who founded the magazine. Oopsie! Turns out that Rev. Graham was a supporter of Donald Trump and voted for him for president. 

Anyway, now 200 or so "evangelicals" have come out in angry contradiction to Galli and his editorial.  You can read that article HERE.

President Trump surely is a controversial, polarizing character in modern American history. You love him or you hate him. We can say that he is not a "moral" or "ethical" man, and there is plenty of evidence to support that statement. Trump is also not a "good Christian" by any stretch of the imagination (although who am I to judge?). Luckily, the U.S. is not a Christian nation, per se. Our country may have been created with respect to certain Christian principles and values, but the founders went out of their way to ensure that the government would never be dominated by any one particular church or religion - like England.

Every voice needs to be heard - even Galli's. This is America, after all, where we fight and die for our First Amendment rights. Nobody should be shouted down or forcibly shut up, no matter how unpopular are their words.  Mark Galli may have taken a provocative stance among conservative Christians, but I admire him for doing it. Donald Trump is, to be honest, a pretty despicable person. Impeachably despicable? Ehhh, I don't know. People...*voters*...should seriously be asking themselves if Trump is really the person we/they want leading our country for another four years? 

For Christians, that's got to be a tough question. To them, morality comes from God.  But this is America; we cannot demand that all politicians believe the same things we do…or even that they be Christians for that matter.  We cannot even tell them what is “moral” behavior and what’s not, for morality is one of those ill-defined, subjective concepts.  Like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said in 1964 when asked to define pornography: ”I know it when I see it!"  But how important is morality in a supposedly religion-free government that has worked so hard to expel God from our lives?  

Well, morality is about how we act towards others within the framework of society, right? Those generally-good feelings (and actions) toward one another are innate to most – but not all – of us humans.  You don’t have to be a Christian to be a moral person - but it helps. Still, as a Christian I cannot demand that a person adhere to the same moral standards as I do.  And so Trump is a dilemma.  I may not personally be able to stand him, but does that mean he can't be a good President?

For atheists, it may even be a harder question - because we know that morals (and their close friend, ethics) are "squishy." They change over time and are not generally set in stone, as it were. Things that were once seen as immoral don’t seem like such a big deal now. And so, should we even care about how "immoral" Trump acts in the present? Perhaps one day in the future, his current behavior, like that of unmarried couples living together, or pregnancy out of wedlock, both of which were once considered highly immoral, may seem perfectly acceptable and inoffensive. 

And wouldn’t that be some shit!

My Waning Love Affair With The Keurig

I like coffee.  But I don’t love coffee like some people do…I don’t need coffee to “get the day started” when I wake up.  And I'm no coffee snob.  I like it; I drink it; end of story.

I’ve bitched before about how our local convenience stores have all gone to these automatic machines that grind and brew cups individually – so no more drinking from a pot that’s been sitting there for who-knows-how-long, or coming in to find no coffee brewed because the clerks were too busy to make more.  Now, instead of just pouring a cup and moving on, we stand in line, tapping our feet and waiting for the guy in front of us to figure out how to work the oh-so-complicated machine and get his damn coffee brewed.  Ahh, progress...

A while back, Keurig coffeemakers became popular.  Such convenience!  Just pop the little pod into the machine and (snap your fingers), instant coffee!  I resisted buying one for a couple of reasons, but finally bit the bullet and became a convert.  Walmart sells one model, the K55 for $134.99.  I found one on Facebook Marketplace - brand new and unused - for $25.00.

And now, after a year or so, the Keurig sits, no longer used, taking up space on my kitchen counter.  I’ve gone back to just making conventional instant coffee.  I can stick a saucepan of water on the stove and have it heated to boiling and poured in a cup before I can get my “Bob McMuffin” (my version of the McDonalds classic) made.  Heating a cup of water in the microwave takes even less time and effort.  Why do I need this Keurig again?

You have to keep refilling the Keurig supply reservoir after every two or three cups or so.  Then you have to wait for it to heat up the water.  Then you have the pod to dispose of.  I buy a package of 48 “Donut Shop” pods from Walmart.  At $14.88 per box, it works out to $0.31 per cup.  On the other hand, an $8.59 container of instant coffee gives me 200 cups, which works out to be $0.05 per cup.  And to me, they taste the same.

True, you can get all kinds of flavors and types of those coffee pods, so everyone in the fam can have their own special blend.  But it’s just me in this house, and like I said, I’m no coffee snob.  Give me any ol’ coffee and I’m happy.  The Keurig is a neat invention, but - for me - it really doesn't do anything better than before.

Cruel Irony

See, here’s the thing about the impeachment of President Trump.  If  Democrats are hinging their whole case on Trump’s “quid pro quo” or “bribery” or whatever in his dealings on that famous phone call with Ukraine President Zelensky, they’re on shaky ground.  All sorts of “experts” have testified, and opinions (about the only thing they can testify to) vary wildly on whether the call was appropriate or not.  Yes it was; no it wasn’t.

Throughout history, U.S. presidents have engaged in these “quid pro quo” deals all the time.  If foreign nations want something from us (usually arms or money) then it would be silly for us to just give those things with no conditions.  And in fact, there are always conditions…strings, if you will – as there should be!  So Trump’s “quid pro quo” was nothing unusual or out of the ordinary.  We’ll give you this military aid…IF…you investigate corruption surrounding Ukraine’s possible involvement the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Where it became an impeachable offense, Democrats claim, is when Trump asked President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden.  The charge is that such an investigation would provide a thing of personal value to Trump in the upcoming 2020 election, and thereby violates the Emoluments Clause of the U.S. Constitution.  Or…wait, hold on…by withholding the military aid, Trump was bribing Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden.

Uhhh…okay.  That’s weak, but I can see the argument.  Is it, by itself, enough to warrant impeachment?  Trump-haters say, “Yes, of course!”  

The rest of us (e.g. the non-Trump-haters) shrug and go, ”That all you got?”  Because like I said, it’s weak sauce.  Democrats are beginning to understand this, and are desperately clawing and grasping to find something that is genuinely impeachable, not just legally but also in the eyes of the American public.  According to recent news reports, even Democrats are becoming wary of all this impeachment drama.

President Trump may be the most lying, most vile, most egotistical, most duplicitous, crookedest, stupidest, most underhanded, most racist, biggest piece of shit president this country has ever seen.  Unfortunately, the best way of removing him from office is by getting someone else elected next time.  

Impeaching Trump will not get him removed from office and will not prevent him from running again in 2020.  And as “bad” a president as he may be (according to democrats), he will handily defeat whoever from the current cast of boobs the DNC chooses to run against him (unless Hillary or Michelle Obama decide to enter the race - then we could have a contest!).

Consider Nancy Pelosi.  She may be many things, but she is not politically inept.  She is one very smart politician.  When she first announced that the House would formally institute an impeachment inquiry against President Trump, you could tell by her facial expression and overall demeanor that her heart was not in it.  She knew that they were about three years too late.  She was saying the right words, but the fire and anger behind them were simply not there.  But she probably did not have a choice.  

Pelosi surely understands that the impeachment saga is losing steam.  The hoped-for uprising of public anger at and vilification of Donald Trump simply did not happen, especially among his base.  If anything, support for the president has become stronger.  And so if the Democrats push ahead with impeachment, Nancy Pelosi might just be the one held responsible for getting Trump reelected.  Talk about cruel irony!

Quid Pro Quo?

Much is made of President Trump violating the so-called “Emoluments Clause”  of the U.S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 9).  Basically, the president cannot receive any…gift, payment or other thing of value from a foreign state or its rulers, officers or representatives.

The issue centers around this term, “quid pro quo” that Congress keeps bandying about.  Basically, the Democrats are saying that by asking Ukraine President Zelensky to investigate Burisma Holdings and Vice President Biden’s involvement in it, Trump was seeking to benefit personally in the 2020 election.  

It is generally acknowledged that nations like the U.S. use quid pro quos all the time to get other countries to do what we want.  Lots of nations need money and arms from the U.S.  And we seem to have plenty of both to give.

Strategically, Ukraine is important in the relationship between the U.S. and Russia (which is apparently still our sworn enemy – who knew!).  We need them to side with us and not Vladdy Putin, and so we’ve bent over backwards to help Ukraine financially when we could.  President Obama sent Joe Biden over to facilitate giving Ukraine $1 billion in aid.  President Trump has continue these financial and military contributions from the U.S.

Speaking of a “quid pro quo,” it’s interesting to note that Biden gave one to Ukraine then-President Poroshenko back in 2014: Fire the Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin or you don’t get the $1 billion.  Shokin was either looking too deeply or not enough deeply enough into corruption within the Ukraine government.  Looks to me like the U.S. was meddling in Ukraine politics.

For his part, President Trump is saying that his “quid pro quo” merely amounted to asking (not demanding!) that Ukraine’s president look into “corruption” in general…and that happens to include Joe Biden because he was involved in Ukraine at the time that Ukraine was meddling in the 2016 election.  (The mainstream media keeps the focus on “Russian interference” but apparently Ukraine was doing it as well.)

Men of good will can disagree on issues.  Personally, I think the Democrats have a weak argument, and they’ll have a hard time convincing the American public that President Trump violated his oath of office and committed an impeachable offense as the House votes to impeach him.  Don’t bother to mention the various polls showing that half of all Americans want Trump removed from office.  I think that if nothing else, the 2016 election taught us that polls cannot be trusted.

Impeachable?

If you went out on the street and asked people if President Trump should be impeached and removed from office, you might very well get a preponderance of “Yes!” responses.  Donald Trump is…let’s not pull any punches…a scumbag.  We all know that.  He does what he wants without much concern for the consequences.  (That’s partly why a lot of people like him.)

But some people – let’s call them “Trump-haters” believe that he is unfit for the office of president, never should have been elected president, and should be removed from office ASAP by any means possible.  This last qualification is a little awkward.  Trump-haters want him gone.  They feel that he’s committed enough impeachable crimes to warrant it.  But the term “impeachable” as they use it is kind of, well, squishy.

Because if you were out on the street and asked people what crimes, exactly President Trump has committed that are impeachable offenses, you’d get a lot of hemming and hawing and foot-shuffling.  The more intelligent respondents might say that he violated the so-called emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution which says you cannot accept any gift, reward or thing of value from a foreign government.  They’ll say that by asking Ukraine President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden, Trump was looking to personally benefit in the 2020 election.  

(Notice though that the Constitution says that a president may not accept any gift, reward or thing of value – it does not say that he can’t solicit such things.  You can ask; you just cannot receive.)

And so we get back to: What exactly has President Trump done to warrant impeachment?  

You cannot impeach a president and have him removed from office simply because he’s a dirtbag and you don’t like him.  You cannot impeach a president because he tweets mean things…or treats people badly, or even because he an egotist and a liar.  It doesn’t work that way.  There has to be a clear impeachable offense…somewhere.  

The American people, however, can impeach a president – sort of.  They can simply not vote for him in the next election.  We have that power!  If the people don’t like Donald Trump, they’ll vote for someone else.  And that form of impeachment might happen in about a year from right now.  But it might not! 

Democrats don’t want to take that chance.  They’ve been talking about impeaching Trump ever since he was sworn in.  Here in November of 2019, Democrats want to make damn sure that Trump is not re-elected next year.  So they’ve…you’ll pardon the pun…trumped-up these charges, claiming that asking President Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden violated the emoluments clause.  It’s weak, I know, but Democrats are running out of time!

Despite what some polls indicate, I don’t think that the American people are convinced that President Trump has done impeachable things.  Maybe I’m wrong, but the people I talk to are getting fatigued over these impeachment proceedings.  (And I’m an Uber drive; I talk to a lot of people in any given day.)  Not everybody in the country is rabidly Left or Right.  Moderate people of both parties actually do see it as a “witch hunt” or at least an act of desperation by Democrats who want to overturn the 2016 election.  They’re starting to lose interest.

I have no doubt that the House of Representatives will vote to impeach President Trump.  But remember, impeachment does not mean removal from office.  For that, the Senate has to weigh-in.  And they’ll never…never! vote to impeach/remove.  But even if they did, it would not prevent Trump from running in 2020. He might not be able to run as a Republican, which would be no big deal because he isn’t much of a Republican anyway.  And if he runs as an Independent, he very well might win again.

Who Sets U.S. Foreign Policy?

So now we know the identity of the infamous whistleblower!  (His name is not important.  It’s been revealed in plenty of other places online if you’re really curious.)  He’s a kid.  He’s 33 now, but all of this dates back to when he was in the Obama administration in 2015.  So he’s being used, in other words thrown to the wolves by the older, more experienced politicians and those of the so-called “deep state” who want to keep their hands clean…at least as clean as possible given that nobody is going to look good when this is all over.

Apparently, the kid works for the CIA, must’ve been some low-level wonk (“intelligence analyst”) probably recruited right out of college, perhaps dreaming he was going to be the next master spy like the fictional Jack Ryan of Tom Clancy novels.  Whatever.

In 2015 the CIA assigned him to the National Security Council (NSC) in the Obama administration working for Susan Rice.  He also worked for Vice President Joe Biden on Ukraine policy issues.  He was “held over” into the Trump administration and handled the “Ukraine desk” (whatever that is) at the NSC, and was eventually brought into the White House until his anti-Trump sentiments were revealed – which we can surmise made him persona non grata.  He has moved back to CIA headquarters…but not before meeting with Senator Adam Schiff (who heads the House Intelligence Committee) and agreeing to become The Whistleblower.  

Since this young man only claims to have second-hand knowledge about the phone call President Trump had with Ukraine President Zelensky, it stands to reason that the source of this second-hand information was U.S. Army Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who actually did listen in on the phone call and who says he had serious misgivings about what President Trump was doing because it…and this is what everybody says…it would jeopardize national security!!  That’s the catch-all, right?  If you make such a claim, who would…or could…prove you wrong?  Who could even question your motives?  I think it’s safe to assume that Col. Vindman and our young whistleblower must’ve talked.

But what Lt. Col. Vindman seems to overlook or conveniently forget is that it is THE PRESIDENT who sets our foreign policy…not Congress, not the Joint Chiefs, not the media, and certainly not U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonels, no matter how well-meaning.  We don’t have to (and won’t) question Lt. Col. Vindman’s patriotism or character.  But we can definitely say that he is off-base here in his testimony.  To him I would say “Sir, just let the president handle foreign policy; after all, he is your Commander In Chief.”

President Trump: Genius or Idiot?

So President Trump recently announced that he would be pulling our troops out of Syria, leaving those brave Kurds (insurgents who have no actual country) on their own.  Oh how people in the U.S. lost their minds!  Everybody had an opinion on What Would Happen Next!  The crux of many people’s complaint was that this would lead to a regeneration of ISIS.

Two weeks later…

Trump: We found and killed the head of ISIS.

Everybody: Oh no!  This will SURELY lead to a regeneration of ISIS!  His number two man will take over!

Two days later…

Trump: Oh, and we killed the number two ISIS guy as well.

After the first guy, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi (the guy who they say actually started ISIS) was killed, President Trump made a speech and very graphically described how Baghdadi died – which was not as a hero or martyr, but as a cowardly dog, using three of his children as a shield and then blowing himself (and them) up with a bomb that he just coincidentally and conveniently happened to be, you know, wearing.  (It’s what all the well-dressed Muslim extremist/terrorists are wearing this Fall!)

Trump’s very clear message was: "America Is Back: Do not screw with us."  The Obama era of conciliation and kowtowing to Muslims is OVER.  Mess with us and we’ll sic the dogs of war on you.  Literally, as in this case.

Trump lulled everyone into a false sense of security, making everyone think he was a big dummy for pulling out of Syria.  Then he pulled out the Big Stick and killed Baghdadi as a parting shot.  And you know that whole scheme was planned out well in advance.  I mean, come one…putting together an “Op” like the one to get Baghdadi (and his Number Two man) must’ve taken a LOT of planning and coordination.

And so President Trump is either a tactical genius or a blithering idiot.  You decide.

Throwing Good Money After Bad?

One last thing on politics before I stop...

Apparently, it is common for those in government to use foreign countries to enrich themselves.  As the Trump-Ukraine debacle unfolds, we discover how money flows out of the country only to flow back in as "commissions" or "consulting fees" to those who set up the deals.  I am not even surprised by this.

I read an article on the Daily Caller website that listed all of the companies Hunter Biden formed with his buddy, Devon Archer.  It was quite complicated.  Together, they were working for foreign companies in both China and Ukraine.  The amount of money these two jokers amassed in various fees may never be tallied and known.

What is interesting to me is that there are absolute, undeniable financial ties between China and Ukraine.  I ask myself, "Why would China be interested in business in Ukraine?"  I suspect it's so people can keep money moving around so much that others lose track of it.

And no, I don't think these activities are limited to the Biden boy and Devon Archer.  What were the nationalities of the biggest foreign donors to the Clinton Foundation?  By their own admission: Ukraine.  Not Great Britain or any other source you might imagine.  Ukraine.

What's so goddam special about Ukraine?  And what does the "humanitarian" Clinton Foundation do for the people of Ukraine?

It's clear, at least to me, that the phony-baloney "consulting" jobs (like those give to Hunter Biden - and others), and "donations" by foreign nationals to organizations like the Clinton Foundation...it's all just a means of obtaining access.  

And maybe that's just how global politics works.  "We'll make sure your country gets $1 billion in aid, but you hire my people as 'consultants' and 'advisors' at $50,000 per month.  Got it?"  Money flows out; money flows in; the economic world keeps turning.  Unless there's some big scandal, nobody (surely not the American public) is any the wiser.

Vice President Bigmouth Joe Biden bragged...bragged! that he and President Obama were all set to withhold $1.8 billion in aid to Ukraine unless a particular General Prosecutor was fired and replaced.  Sure enough, the deed was done.  As was the loan.

My question: What happened to all that money?  I mean, we know that "some" of it came back into the U.S. in the form of consulting fees, bogus agency fees and kickbacks, but where did the rest go?  Does nobody care that the U.S. can simply give away a billion dollars or so to help the economy of some shithole ex-Russian country just so they don't side with Vladdy Putin?  Is this why our national debt is so high?  How much more money do we give away every year to other nations?  

And why do we keep doing it?

These Nutsy-Cuckoo Times

This is not a political blog, and I'm sure you do not come here for political discussion.  The reason I don’t like talking politics is twofold.  For one thing, I know very little about the subject.  Secondly, I don’t really care all that much.  But please indulge me for a moment while I comment on the shitstorm that our society is currently weathering, won't you? I promise I'll be brief, and then we'll be back to talking about flying and motorcycles.

My parents were staunch democrats.  They preached that the Democratic Party was for the working man, while the Republicans were for Big Business.  I didn’t think it through back then (what teenager ever thinks anything through?), but without big (and small) businesses there wouldn’t be any need for working men.  So it’s a symbiotic relationship, to be sure.

As a nascent union organizer in the 1990’s, I came to see that if we squeezed every last dime out of the company, we very well might find ourselves out of work.  Somehow, the contract we were negotiating had to be good for us and good for the company. 

So this whole current Ukraine Affair just leaves me disgusted.  OF COURSE, Joe Biden got his son Hunter appointed to the Board of Directors of Burisma Holdings (the largest natural gas company in Ukraine).  Of course, he did!  And Biden wasn’t being totally honest when he said that he and Hunter never discussed Burisma.  Bullshit!  (Pardon my French.)  Hunter, who knew nothing about the natural gas industry, slid into a cushy, do-nothing job that netted him a pretty nice salary.  Nepotism?  Sure.  Unethical?  Oh yeah.  Illegal?  Maaayyyybee…but maybe not.

And then President Trump, in a now-famous phone call, asked the current president of Ukraine to look into this Biden/Burisma deal.  And then everything blew up.

I love the “everybody knows” theory.  Everybody knows that what Trump did was an impeachable offense.  Everybody, from the man on the street to some top people in government say that what President Trump did was wrong.  And maybe it was!  But was it illegal?  Was it an impeachable offense?  Hmm.  Maaayyyybeee.  “Everybody” may know the answer to that.  Me?  I don’t know.  Nor do I care.

I have three brilliant sisters. One is an archeologist and two are attorneys. Over the years, I have learned a lot from all three. Just oneof the things I’ve learned is that when it comes to the law, NOTHING is ever cut-and-dried. NOTHING is ever totally black-or-white. The 1995 O.J. Simpson trial surely taught us that. If you were alive and watching TV back then, you know as well as I do that O.J. got away with murder.
The people who hate the president and want him removed from office make their case very passionately. Trump is a bad man who’s gotta go! But Trump supporters are just as passionate in their defense of the manThis is not a political blog, and you probably do not come here for political discussion. The reason I don’t like talking politics is twofold. For one thing, I know very little about the subject. Secondly, I don’t really care all that much.

My parents were staunch democrats. They preached that the Democratic Party was for the working man, while the Republicans were for Big Business. I didn’t think it through back then (what teenager ever thinks anything through?), but without big businesses there wouldn’t be any need for working men. So it’s a symbiotic relationship, to be sure.

As a nascent union organizer in the 1990’s, I came to see that if we squeezed every last dime out of the company, we very well might find ourselves out of work. Somehow, the contract we were negotiating had to be good for us and good for the company.

So this whole current Ukraine Affair just leaves me disgusted. OF COURSE, Joe Biden got his son Hunter appointed to the Board of Directors of Burisma Holdings (the largest natural gas company in Ukraine). Of course, he did! And Biden wasn’t being totally honest when he said that he and Hunter never discussed Burisma. Bullshit! (Pardon my French.) Hunter, who knew nothing about the natural gas industry, slid into a cushy, do-nothing job that netted him a pretty nice salary. Nepotism? Sure. Unethical? Oh yeah. Illegal? Maaayyyybee…

And then President Trump, in a now-famous phone call, asked the now-president of Ukraine to look into this Biden/Burisma deal. And then everything blew up.

I love the “everybody knows” theory. Everybody knows that what Trump did was an impeachable offense. Everybody, from the man on the street to the top people in government say that what President Trump did was wrong. And maybe it was! But was it illegal? Was it an impeachable offense? Hmm. Maaayyyybeee. “Everybody” may know the answer to that. Me? I don’t know. Nor do I care.

I have three brilliant sisters. One is an archeologist and two are attorneys. Over the years, I have learned a lot from all three. One thing I’ve learned is that when it comes to the law, NOTHING is ever cut-and-dried. NOTHING is ever totally black-or-white.

The people who hate the president and want him removed from office make their case very passionately. Trump is a bad man who’s gotta go! But Trump supporters are just as passionate in their defense of the man. Best president ever!

And again, ol’ Bob is caught in the middle, not knowing what to think, and feeling guilty for not having an opinion.

But here’s what I do think. We do not live in a strict democracy. The U.S. is a democratic republic. We elect people to run the country for us, because most of us: a) don’t want to; and b) are uniquely unqualified to do so. I’m more “b” than “a” but truth be told I go both ways there.

The trouble is that we don’t let our leaders do their jobs. We scrutinize, criticize and second-guess every damn decision they make. The end result is that we have an entire electorate that is afraid of saying or doing ANYTHING because they know they’ll get a ton of negative feedback or at least cause a Twitterstorm with which they’ll have to deal.

The only politician with any guts is Beto O’Rourke. He came out out and actually said it out loud: The left wants to confiscate our guns. Heh. I admire his honesty, but good luck getting ANY conservative to vote for you, Beto! You might as well quit the race now and not waste any more of your time or money.

Look, I say: If President Trump is doing a really bad job, then the American people will not vote for him in 2020. No, I don’t think he’ll destroy the country…or our democracy in the meantime. The republic has withstood some pretty crappy presidents; I doubt Trump is even the worst.

President Trump is…different. He’s different than any other president we’ve ever had. He says and does things that are simply…there is no other word for it…crazy. Other politicians hate him, but Trump connects with the American people on a level that is hard to explain or understand. His supporters overlook so much crap that it’s really hard to fathom.

The most insane and ironic thing I’ve heard from the Democrats was, ”We have to impeach Trump to keep him from getting re-elected.” If that doesn’t tell you something about these nutsy-cuckoo times we’re living in, I don’t know what else would.
Best president ever!

And again, ol’ Bob is caught in the middle, not knowing what to think, and feeling kind of guilty for not having an opinion.

But here’s what I think.  We do not live in a strict democracy.  The U.S. is a democratic republic.  We elect people to run the country for us, because most of us: a) don’t want to; and b) are uniquely unqualified to do so.  I’m more “b” than “a” but truth be told I go both ways there.

The trouble is that we don’t let our leaders do their jobs.  We scrutinize, criticize and second-guess every damn decision they make.  The end result is that we have an entire electorate that is afraid of saying or doing ANYTHING because they know they’ll get a ton of negative feedback or at least cause a Twitterstorm with which they’ll have to deal.  Except our president - he seems to be playing by a completely different set of rules.

The only politician with any guts is Beto O’Rourke.  He came right out and actually said it out loud: The left wants to confiscate our guns.  Heh.  I admire his honesty, but good luck getting ANY conservative to vote for you, Beto!  You might as well quit the race now and not waste any more of your time or money.

Look, I say: If President Trump is doing a really bad job, then the American people will not vote for him in 2020.  No, I don’t think he’ll destroy the country…or our democracy in the meantime.  In my life I've seen eleven presidents.  The republic has withstood some pretty crappy ones; I doubt Trump is even the worst.

President Trump is…different.  He’s different than any other president we’ve ever had.  He says and does things that are simply…there is no other word for it…crazy.  Other politicians hate him, but Trump connects with the American people on a level that is hard to explain or understand.  His supporters overlook so much crap that it’s really hard to believe.

The most insane and ironic thing I’ve heard from the Democrats was, ”We have to impeach Trump to keep him from getting re-elected.”  If that doesn’t tell you something about these nutsy-cuckoo times we’re living in, I don’t know what else would.

Wacky Automotive News, Part II

If I were to say the word, “Porsche,” your natural response would probably be, “911.” It is the iconic German sportscar, and has been since its introduction in 1963. It is sexy and fast, and many a teenage boy has lusted over it, dreaming about the day they might someday own one. Yes, including me.

Over the years, Porsche has built its reputation on high-performance. Their racing cars are legendary. Their street cars have always been powered by a sophisticated six-cylinder engine that traces its roots all the way back to the Volkswagen engine from which it was spawned. Today’s modern Porsche engines are highly advanced, of course, eons beyond their predecessors.

But things change.  As we look for a way to replace the internal combustion engine, everybody is scrambling to design and produce totally electric vehicles. 

In 1996, General Motors tried with their funny-looking EV-1. That didn’t work out for reasons that are both unclear and controversial. All of the EV-1’s were recalled and (supposedly) destroyed. After that, electric car progress was slow, hampered by battery technology that wasn’t improving as fast as people hoped.

In 2012, along came Tesla with the Model S, which is all-electric.  A boutique manufacturer of high-end vehicles, Tesla was seen as the “anti-GM.” Happily, the Model S was a pretty good design right off the bat. Battery life and the resultant range-before-charging were decent. But the scarcity of charging stations limited Tesla’s market to places like Los Angeles…bigger cities.

With Tesla’s success, we knew it would only be a matter of time until the major automakers woke up and joined the fray. In 2016, GM got back in the game with a model called the Bolt. Other automakers have committed to producing electric vehicles – including Volkswagen, which promises us a new version of the Microbus, which will be all-electric. (Tree-hugging hippies all over the world should rejoice.)

So along comes Porsche. They recently introduced an all-electric model called the Taycan (Turkish for “young, lively horse”). It is a low-slung, four-door car, unmistakably Porsche and is as drop-dead beautiful as you’d expect.

Porsche is bringing out two versions: the Taycan Turbo, and the Taycan Turbo S.

Say…what? Turbo?

When applied to a motor vehicle, the word “turbo” generally…usually means turbocharged. A turbocharger is a device fitted to a conventional internal-combustion engine to increase its power. The turbo uses hot exhaust gases to spin a tiny turbine wheel. This in turn spins another tiny turbine wheel, and this one is in the intake stream. This pressurizes the intake fuel/air mixture, which results in more power. You can take a little, weak engine, stick a turbocharger on it and make it have the power of a big engine. It’s like magic!

Confusingly, “turbo” can also be short for “turbine-powered” – usually an aircraft powered by turboshaft (i.e. “jet”) engines connected to a propeller. For instance, take the general aviation twin-engine airplane called the Aero Commander series. Over the years, various models of the plane have been powered by both piston and turboshaft engines. Externally, they look nearly identical to the untrained observer. The Commanders with the turboshaft engines are called “Turbo-Commanders.”  Which they shouldn't be.

The problem is that turbine-powered and turbocharged aircraft are very different and use vastly different fuel. A turbine engine uses jet fuel and cannot run on “avgas.” A turbocharged piston engine uses regular aviation gasoline (“avgas”) and cannot run on jet fuel. When landing to refuel, Aero Commander pilots have to be ever diligent that the refueling company puts in the right kind. It’s easy to make a mistake!  Accidents have happened.  (It is rumored that the historic B-17 that crashed recently in Connecticut may have been fueled with jet fuel.)

Sorry, I didn’t mean to go off on such a technical tangent just to explain the meaning of the word, “turbo” and how it is usually applied.

Okay, so the automotive world is laughing at Porsche for calling their all-electric car a “turbo” when it is clearly not turbocharged.

But Porsche is being clever. Very, very clever. The word turbo by itself has entered our general lexicon. It’s analogous to “hyper.” Like, ”Man, it’s hot in here. Put that air conditioner on turbo!” Or, "Man, my girlfriend was turbo angry with me for forgetting her birthday.” You get the idea. And yes, I’ve heard both of those expressions.

So Porsche appropriated the word “turbo” and applied it to their Taycan, even though the car does not have a conventional gas engine and is definitely not turbocharged. Heh. But it conveys the idea that the car is fast, no? You’ve got to give the marketing guys at Porsche credit. I think it’s both hilarious and smart.

I still want one - maybe even more!

Wacky Automotive News

I like to call myself a “car guy.” I’ve always liked cars…worked on them, etc. But I admit that as time goes on it’s harder and harder to keep up on all of the new vehicles that get introduced.

My friend Matt (who actually is a car guy) asked me what I thought of the new, mid-engine Chevy Corvette, and I kind of drew a blank. Yes, I’d certainly seen pictures of it and the specifications, and I’d read all of the breathless descriptions of it in the car magazines. But I really had no opinion on it. I’ve never really been “into” Corvettes. Maybe I’m not such a car guy after all.  Ah, well.

The Really Big News of the automotive world in the last couple of weeks is that Volkswagen is…wait for it :::drumroll::: changing their iconic logo! Everybody knows the “VW” logo, right? It’s been staring at us from the front of Microbuses, Golfs and Jettas since forever. It’s gone through a couple of very minor permutations over the years, but has always stayed basically the same. Oh, and none of the other evolutions of the logo garnered any attention from the press.

Now, here in 2019, for some reason Volkswagen decided that they needed to update the logo. Accordingly, they made a big announcement. The obviously-bored automotive press, seized on this news and reported it with a seriousness befitting the death of General Motors (should that ever happen).

Here’s the old one.

And here’s the new one.  

Not much difference, you say?  True.  But look more closely and sharp-eyed readers will see that the space between the "V" and the "W" is larger on the new logo.  And there is a space at the bottom of the "legs" of the "W" and the surrounding circle.  Completely different!  Volkswagen says that the old, three-dimensional logo was not computer friendly, whatever that means.

I guess that for Germans, radical change comes a little bit at a time.  Baby steps, Wolfgang, baby steps.

Getting Emotionally Attached To A Car

Before I talk much about Matt and my trip from Washington to his home in Atlanta, Georgia, I have to tell you a little bit about my car. For the last ten years or so I’ve driven minivans that were converted into taxis. But last year I ditched the cabs and switched over to Uber. Doing so allowed me to use a “regular” car, i.e. one with no taxi branding. It didn't have to be a van, either.  Ah, but which one to choose?

I wanted something with good gas mileage. I was getting killed with my last van (a Dodge Caravan) which averaged 14-15 mpg in city driving. A lot of Uber drivers use the Toyota Prius hybrid. They’re fairly inexpensive to buy, they get great gas mileage and they’re very cheap to operate. For me though, I’m just not a fan. I think the Prius looks funky, which you can read as "ugly." 

My sister once had a succession of Toyota Avalons. They were beautiful cars! For one thing, they’re huge – you can easily fit six people inside. And the sweet 3.0 liter V-6 engine powering the thing runs like a friggin' sewing machine. To me, the Avalon is at least as good a car as a Lexus, without the Lexus' high price. Or so I thought.

Turns out that Avalons hold their value pretty well. Even older ones are not cheap. And not only that, they get horrible gas mileage in the city! To say I was disappointed would be an understatement.

Then I thought about diesels. I’ve always liked the Volkswagen Jetta, and I thought if I could find a nice one with a diesel it would be just the ticket. So I started looking around. Coincidentally, my local Pensacola dealer had a fire-engine red Jetta station wagon in stock. But they wanted a lot of money for it. Red cars must command higher prices.

But over in Mobile, Alabama there was a VW dealer that had a couple of diesel Jetta sedans for sale – both at very attractive prices. Out of curiosity, my buddy Terry and I drove over in my van. A little later that day I drove off in a used silver VW diesel Jetta.

A word about Volkswagen diesels…

Yes, Volkswagen got caught cheating on the U.S. emissions test. It is not as serious as you might imagine. The details are very complicated – much too complicated to go into on this blog - but you can read all about it HERE. The upshot is that VW wasn't completely disabling the emission control systems of their cars.  They just had to fool the sensors into thinking that the vehicle's nitrogen-oxide emissions were a little lower than they actually were. 

Nitrogen-oxide emissions are the ones that create the black soot that diesels used to be known for.  The U.S. has the most-stringent nitrogen-oxide standards of any country in the world.  But VW diesels couldn't quite meet them.  So the clever German engineers at VW programmed the car's computer to recognize when emission-testing gear was hooked up.  Then it would adjust the fuel-air mixture accordingly to temporarily get the right readings.  When the test gear was removed, the car reverted to its regular ways.  

But even so, it's not like the VW's were rolling coal as the drivers of modified diesel pickup trucks like to say when their trucks are laying down a thick cloud of black smoke under acceleration.  Modern diesel trucks and cars (and VW's) have been pretty smoke-free for years as limits got tighter and tighter.

Once it was discovered that VW cheated, they had to fix the cars…fix them or buy ‘em back if that’s what the owner wanted. VW ended up buying back a shit-ton of cars. They fixed those and then re-sold them in their dealerships. Needless to say, anyone who’d ever heard of the “dieselgate” scandal stayed far away from a Volkswagen diesel.  The stigma was real, man.

To get rid of the cars, VW offered an incredible warranty. As a “certified pre-owned” used car, my 2012 Jetta TDI came with a two-year, unlimited mileage bumper-to-bumper warranty plus an extended warranty on the engine and transmission.  Hey, it was enough to sell me!

I love this car!  Some people like Volkwagens, some don’t. I happen to really like them…especially this one and the way it drives. I don’t know what it is, but German cars just drive…differently…than other makes. They’re quirky, for sure, but they have a distinctive and solid feel on the road.

The Jetta is a little tight for five people (I maybe should’ve bought the slightly-larger Passat), but it has an absolutely huge trunk. People comment on that all the time. They also think it’s way newer than it is – VW really hasn’t changed the Jetta much over the years. I had mine in for service recently, and the loaner car was a 2019 Jetta. It really looked, felt and drove a lot like my own - with the exception of the gas mileage, which was worse than my diesel.

In town, my TDI averages about 30 mpg. Not great, but it’s been a really hot summer and I’ve been doing a lot of sitting and idling with the a/c on, which is hell on gas mileage. But out on the highway the Jetta routinely turns in 40 mpg, sometimes more. On a long trip I can plan on 40. It’s amazing. And the turbo-diesel engine makes the car so much fun to drive! On the Interstate, just push the gas pedal down and the thing literally surges powerfully ahead – no downshifting, no screaming engine, no drama. It just goes!  It's fun.

Even though I'm a "car guy," it has been a long time since I was excited about or even emotionally attached to a damn car. But I really love this VW Jetta. I plan to drive the wheels off it and then sell it and find another diesel Jetta with lower mileage.

Sand Dunes, Sea Oats, and Salty Dogs

Terry and I are very different.  Perhaps it is those differences that make us such good friends.  I mentioned in a previous post that while he and I were out on an early-morning motorcycle ride along the beach, we stopped to take some pictures of our bikes. Terry, overcome with the beauty of our surroundings began composing a poem. In my post I sort of scoffed that I'm not much for poetry. But I do respect it, I suppose.

The road Terry and I were riding on is a little barrier island that connects Pensacola and Navarre Beaches. It is home to Gulf Islands National Seashore. Aside from a few parking lots, it's a pretty remote and desolate area, devoid of development. There's little traffic. It kind of has the feel of an undiscovered no-man's-land.

Now, I'm generally not a romantic, introspective or sensitive guy. I guess I'm too jaded to be really wowed by anything anymore. But! Hang on... I will admit that sometimes you just have to stop and smell the sea oats, to coin a phrase. And if you do...if you just stop, and take a moment to stare out over the Gulf of Mexico, take in the clean, fresh salt air and listen to the waves lapping gently at the water's edge, you cannot help but be moved by the incredible beauty and tranquility of the place. Even a crusty old guy like me can appreciate that. As awesome as the experience was, it did not, however, inspire me to wax poetic.

Terry, on the other hand...well, like I say, we're different.  I mentioned that he had started to compose a poem on the side of the road there.  Later on, he posted the finished version on his Facebook page.

Sand Dunes, Sea Oats, and Salty Dogs

                             by Terry May

Sometimes I wanna go somewhere that's nowhere,
A place without a name,
Where the sky is bluer,
The water is clearer,
And the sun dances on the surface
Like a million sparkling diamonds,
Enough to make giddy girl giggle,
Don't dare to ask me where,
I'll tell you a Pirate's riddle,
It's not on Pensacola Beach or Navarre,
It's somewhere in the middle,
That's exactly where you are,
Somewhere on the National Seashore,
Don't blink or you will go too far!

Total Recall

Oh, I’m glad I’m not a writer. My friend Terry actually is a writer. He’s got a book that’s out now called, “The Broken Earth.” It’s a historical novel, set in the time right after the end of the Civil War.

Being old (semi-)retired guys, Terry and I have a lot of free time. So we go out to eat a lot – breakfasts and lunches, mostly. When the weather is nice, we'll hop on our motorcycles early and ride off to someplace interesting for breakfast. And last Thursday we did just that.

Since we live in diametrically opposite ends of our little coastal city, we met up in downtown Pensacola just after sunrise. From there we rode out to the beach, and then eastbound on Route 399 which connects Pensacola Beach and Navarre Beach.

Rte 399 is a stunningly beautiful road that traverses the thin, fragile barrier island of sugar-white sand and sea oats. There used to be tall dunes on either side, hindering the view of the Gulf of Mexico, but Hurricanes Erin, Opal and Ivan respectively blew the dunes away. Now, drivers and motorcycle riders have a clear view of the water for the entire ride. Along the way, we stopped at various points to take some pictures of our bikes in the soft morning sun.

At one such photo-op, Terry began waxing poetic, as he's sometimes inspired to do. ”The sun is sparkling on the water…like…the diamonds on a little girl’s…something…” And that’s when I walked away to let him compose his poem in peace. I am not a fan of poetry. I am definitely…and defiantly not a poet.

At breakfast in a restaurant called Juana’s Pagoda on the water in Navarre Beach, Terry regaled me, as he usually does, with stories of his youth. He has an uncanny ability to remember intricate details of every person he’s ever met, all the way back to his elementary school days and maybe as early as the womb. He knows stuff like his late father’s birthday, as well as the day and date that he died. When he was a taxi- and then later an Uber driver, he would remember all of the details of the lives of every passenger he carried. It’s a unique – and quite bizarre – trait.

Sometimes, when we’re together, Terry will bring up stories from his past – events that happened, or people that he knew. Just being someplace can trigger odd memories for him, which he recalls with surprising clarity.

I am often astounded and amazed, and more than a little impressed at Terry’s ability to remember these kinds of things. But then it dawns on me: He’s a writer. He needs to remember these things because those very details are what allow him to flesh-out the backgrounds of the characters in the books he writes.

Me, I’d have to make it all up. I don’t remember shit. And moreover, I don’t want to. As soon as my passengers are out of my car, they’re gone from my consciousness. I don't remember which day of the week my dad died - hell, I don't even remember what year he died.  I’d never make a good cop; my powers of observation and retention are poor.

Police Officer (showing me two pictures: one, a mugshot of a man and the other, a security camera picture of a man with a gun getting out of my Uber in a bank parking lot): ”Mr. Barbanes, is this the man you dropped off at the Hancock Bank on Airport Road at 2:53 yesterday afternoon…the man that robbed that bank?”

Me: ”Uhhh, durrrrr…could be…”

Terry would know the man’s life story…where he grew up, who his parents were, how many brothers and sisters he had, that he had a mole on the back of his neck, what he’s doing in Pensacola, and what he plans to do with the money.

So not only would I not make a good policeman, I’ll never be a good novelist, either.

Terry, on the other hand, has that gift of being able to jot stuff down in his mind and file it away for future use. Thus, he’ll be able to populate his books with interesting people and their unique personalities. You know how movie or book critics sometimes complain that, ”The characters were not well-developed.” Well, Terry won’t ever have to hear that said about his work.